1. Field of the Invention
The present invention relates to a method and system for stabilizing a spinal column and, more particularly, to a method and system of spinal fixation in which one or more screw type securing members are implanted and fixed into a portion of a patient's spinal column and a longitudinal member including flexible, semi-rigid rod-like or plate-like structures of various cross-sections (hereinafter referred to as “rods” or “plates”, respectively) are connected and fixed to the upper ends of the securing members to provide stabilization of the spinal column.
2. Description of the Related Art
Degenerative spinal column diseases, such as disc degenerative diseases (DDD), spinal stenosis, spondylolisthesis, and so on, need surgical operation if they do not take a turn for the better by conservative management. Typically, spinal decompression is the first surgical procedure that is performed. The primary purpose of decompression is to reduce pressure in the spinal canal and on nerve roots located therein by removing a certain tissue of the spinal column to reduce or eliminate the pressure and pain caused by the pressure. If the tissue of the spinal column is removed the pain is reduced but the spinal column is weakened. Therefore, fusion surgery (e.g., ALIF, PLIF or posterolateral fusion) is often necessary for spinal stability following the decompression procedure. However, following the surgical procedure, fusion takes additional time to achieve maximum stability and a spinal fixation device is typically used to support the spinal column until a desired level of fusion is achieved. Depending on a patient's particular circumstances and condition, a spinal fixation surgery can sometimes be performed immediately following decompression, without performing the fusion procedure. The fixation surgery is performed in most cases because it provides immediate postoperative stability and, if fusion surgery has also been performed, it provides support of the spine until sufficient fusion and stability has been achieved.
Conventional methods of spinal fixation utilize a rigid spinal fixation device to support an injured spinal part and prevent movement of the injured part. These conventional spinal fixation devices include: fixing screws configured to be inserted into the spinal pedicle or sacral of the backbone to a predetermined depth and angle, rods or plates configured to be positioned adjacent to the injured spinal part, and coupling elements for connecting and coupling the rods or plates to the fixing screws such that the injured spinal part is supported and held in a relatively fixed position by the rods or plates.
U.S. Pat. No. 6,193,720 discloses a conventional spinal fixation device, in which connection members of a rod or plate type are mounted on the upper ends of at least one or more screws inserted into the spinal pedicle or sacral of the backbone. The connection units, such as the rods and plates, are used to stabilize the injured part of the spinal column which has been weakened by decompression. The connection units also prevent further pain and injury to the patient by substantially restraining the movement of the spinal column. However, because the connection units prevent normal movement of the spinal column, after prolonged use, the spinal fixation device can cause ill effects, such as “junctional syndrome” (transitional syndrome) or “fusion disease” resulting in further complications and abnormalities associated with the spinal column. In particular, due to the high rigidity of the rods or plates used in conventional fixation devices, the patient's fixed joints are not allowed to move after the surgical operation, and the movement of the spinal joints located above or under the operated area is increased. Consequently, such spinal fixation devices cause decreased mobility of the patient and increased stress and instability to the spinal column joints adjacent to the operated area.
It has been reported that excessive rigid spinal fixation is not helpful to the fusion process due to load shielding caused by rigid fixation. Thus, trials using load sharing semi-rigid spinal fixation devices have been performed to eliminate this problem and assist the bone fusion process. For example, U.S. Pat. No. 5,672,175, U.S. Pat. No. 5,540,688, and U.S. Pub No 2001/0037111 disclose dynamic spine stabilization devices having flexible designs that permit axial load translation (i.e., along the vertical axis of the spine) for bone fusion promotion. However, because these devices are intended for use following a bone fusion procedure, they are not well-suited for spinal fixation without fusion. Thus, in the end result, these devices do not prevent the problem of rigid fixation resulting from fusion.
To solve the above-described problems associated with rigid fixation, non-fusion technologies have been developed. The Graf band is one example of a non-fusion fixation device that is applied after decompression without bone fusion. The Graf band is composed of a polyethylene band and pedicle screws to couple the polyethylene band to the spinal vertebrae requiring stabilization. The primary purpose of the Graf band is to prevent sagittal rotation (flexion instability) of the injured spinal parts. Thus, it is effective in selected cases but is not appropriate for cases that require greater stability and fixation. See, Kanayarna et al, Journal of Neurosurgery 95(1 Suppl):5-10, 2001, Markwalder & Wenger, Acta Neurochrgica 145(3):209-14.). Another non-fusion fixation device called “Dynesys” has recently been introduced. See Stoll et al, European Spine Journal 11 Suppl 2:S170-8, 2002, Schmoelz et. al., J. of Spinal Disorder & Techniques 16(4):418-23, 2003. The Dynesys device is similar to the Graf band except it uses a polycarburethane spacer between the screws to maintain the distance between the heads of two corresponding pedicle screws and, hence, adjacent vertebrae in which the screws are fixed. Early reports by the inventors of the Dynesys device indicate it has been successful in many cases. However, it has not yet been determined whether the Dynesys device can maintain long-term stability with flexibility and durability in a controlled study. Because it has polyethylene components and interfaces, there is a risk of mechanical failure. Furthermore, due to the mechanical configuration of the device, the surgical technique required to attach the device to the spinal column is complex and complicated.
U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,282,863 and 4,748,260 disclose a flexible spinal stabilization system and method using a plastic, non-metallic rod. U.S. patent publication no. 2003/0083657 discloses another example of a flexible spinal stabilization device that uses a flexible elongate member. These devices are flexible but they are not well-suited for enduring long-term axial loading and stress. Additionally, the degree of desired flexibility vs. rigidity may vary from patient to patient. The design of existing flexible fixation devices are not well suited to provide varying levels of flexibility to provide optimum results for each individual candidate. For example, U.S. Pat. No. 5,672,175 discloses a flexible spinal fixation device which utilizes a flexible rod made of metal alloy and/or a composite material. Additionally, compression or extension springs are coiled around the rod for the purpose of providing de-rotation forces on the vertebrae in a desired direction. However, this patent is primarily concerned with providing a spinal fixation device that permits “relative longitudinal translational sliding movement along [the] vertical axis” of the spine and neither teaches nor suggests any particular designs of connection units (e.g., rods or plates) that can provide various flexibility characteristics. Prior flexible rods such as that mentioned in U.S. Pat. No. 5,672,175 typically have solid construction with a relatively small diameter in order to provide a desired level of flexibility. Because they are typically very thin to provide suitable flexibility, such prior art rods are prone to mechanical failure and have been known to break after implantation in patients.
Therefore, conventional spinal fixation devices have not provided a comprehensive and balanced solution to the problems associated with curing spinal diseases. Many of the prior devices are characterized by excessive rigidity, which leads to the problems discussed above while others, though providing some flexibility, are not well-adapted to provide long-term stability and/or varying degrees of flexibility. Therefore, there is a need for an improved dynamic spinal fixation device that provides a desired level of flexibility to the injured parts of the spinal column, while also providing long-term durability and consistent stabilization of the spinal column.
Additionally, in a conventional surgical method for fixing the spinal fixation device to the spinal column, a doctor incises the midline of the back to about 10-15 centimeters, and then, dissects and retracts it to both sides. In this way, the doctor performs muscular dissection to expose the outer part of the facet joint. Next, after the dissection, the doctor finds an entrance point to the spinal pedicle using radiographic devices (e.g., C-arm flouroscopy), and inserts securing members of the spinal fixation device (referred to as “spinal pedicle screws”) into the spinal pedicle. Thereafter, the connection units (e.g., rods or plates) are attached to the upper portions of the pedicle screws in order to provide support and stability to the injured portion of the spinal column. Thus, in conventional spinal fixation procedures, the patient's back is incised about 10˜15 cm, and as a result, the back muscle, which is important for maintaining the spinal column, is incised or injured, resulting in significant post-operative pain to the patient and a slow recovery period.
Recently, to reduce patient trauma, a minimally invasive surgical procedure has been developed which is capable of performing spinal fixation surgery through a relatively small hole or “window” that is created in the patient's back at the location of the surgical procedure. Through the use of an endoscope, or microscope, minimally invasive surgery allows a much smaller incision of the patient's affected area. Through this smaller incision, two or more securing members (e.g., pedicle screws) of the spinal fixation device are screwed into respective spinal pedicle areas using a navigation system. Thereafter, special tools are used to connect the stabilizing members (e.g., rods or plates) of the fixation device to the securing members. Alternatively, or additionally, the surgical procedure may include inserting a step dilator into the incision and then gradually increasing the diameter of the dilator. Thereafter, a tubular retractor is inserted into the dilated area to retract the patient's muscle and provide a visual field for surgery. After establishing this visual field, decompression and, if desired, fusion procedures may be performed, followed by a fixation procedure, which includes the steps of finding the position of the spinal pedicle, inserting pedicle screws into the spinal pedicle, using an endoscope or a microscope, and securing the stabilization members (e.g., rods or plates) to the pedicle screws in order to stabilize and support the weakened spinal column.
One of the most challenging aspects of performing the minimally invasive spinal fixation procedure is locating the entry point for the pedicle screw under endoscopic or microscopic visualization. Usually anatomical landmarks and/or radiographic devices are used to find the entry point, but clear anatomical relationships are often difficult to identify due to the confined working space. Additionally, the minimally invasive procedure requires that a significant amount of the soft tissue must be removed to reveal the anatomy of the regions for pedicle screw insertion. The removal of this soft tissue results in bleeding in the affected area, thereby adding to the difficulty of finding the correct position to insert the securing members and causing damage to the muscles and soft tissue surrounding the surgical area. Furthermore, because it is difficult to accurately locate the point of insertion for the securing members, conventional procedures are unnecessarily traumatic.
Radiography techniques have been proposed and implemented in an attempt to more accurately and quickly find the position of the spinal pedicle in which the securing members will be inserted. However, it is often difficult to obtain clear images required for finding the corresponding position of the spinal pedicle using radiography techniques due to radiographic interference caused by metallic tools and equipment used during the surgical operation. Moreover, reading and interpreting radiographic images is a complex task requiring significant training and expertise. Radiography poses a further problem in that the patient is exposed to significant amounts of radiation.
Although some guidance systems have been developed which guide the insertion of a pedicle screw to the desired entry point on the spinal pedicle, these prior systems have proven difficult to use and, furthermore, hinder the operation procedure. For example, prior guidance systems for pedicle screw insertion utilize a long wire that is inserted through a guide tube that is inserted through a patient's back muscle and tissue. The location of insertion of the guide tube is determined by radiographic means (e.g., C-arm fluoroscope) and driven until a first end portion of the guide tube reaches the desired location on the surface of the pedicle bone. Thereafter, a first end portion of the guide wire, typically made of a biocompatible metal material, is inserted into the guide tube and pushed into the pedicle bone, while the opposite end of the wire remains protruding out of the patient's back. After the guide wire has been fixed into the pedicle bone, the guide tube is removed, and a hole centered around the guide wire is dilated and retracted. Finally, a pedicle screw having an axial hole or channel configured to receive the guide wire therethrough is guided by the guide wire to the desired location on the pedicle bone, where the pedicle screw is screw-driven into the pedicle.
Although the concept of the wire guidance system is a good one, in practice, the guide wire has been very difficult to use. Because it is a relatively long and thin wire, the structural integrity of the guide wire often fails during attempts to drive one end of the wire into the pedicle bone, making the process unnecessarily time-consuming and laborious. Furthermore, because the wire bends and crimps during insertion, it does not provide a smooth and secure anchor for guiding subsequent tooling and pedicle screws to the entry point on the pedicle. Furthermore, current percutaneous wire guiding systems are used in conjunction with C-arm flouroscopy (or other radiographic device) without direct visualization with the use of an endoscope or microscope. Thus, current wire guidance systems pose a potential risk of misplacement or pedicle breakage. Finally, because one end of the wire remains protruding out of the head of the pedicle screw, and the patient's back, this wire hinders freedom of motion by the surgeon in performing the various subsequent procedures involved in spinal fixation surgery. Thus, there is a need to provide an improved guidance system, adaptable for use in minimally invasive pedicle screw fixation procedures under endoscopic or microscopic visualization, which is easier to implant into the spinal pedicle and will not hinder subsequent procedures performed by the surgeon.
As discussed above, existing methods and devices used to cure spinal diseases are in need of much improvement. Most conventional spinal fixation devices are too rigid and inflexible. This excessive rigidity causes further abnormalities and diseases of the spine, as well as significant discomfort to the patient. Although some existing spinal fixation devices do provide some level of flexibility, these devices are not designed or manufactured so that varying levels of flexibility may be easily obtained to provide a desired level of flexibility for each particular patient. Additionally, prior art devices having flexible connection units (e.g., rods or plates) pose a greater risk of mechanical failure and do not provide long-term durability and stabilization of the spine. Furthermore, existing methods of performing the spinal fixation procedure are unnecessarily traumatic to the patient due to the difficulty in finding the precise location of the spinal pedicle or sacral of the backbone where the spinal fixation device will be secured.